The Assembly met at 10.30 am (the Initial Presiding Officer (The Lord Alderdice of Knock) in the Chair).

Presiding Officer's Business

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer.

Lord Alderdice: I cannot take a point of order now, because the Assembly has not quite been constituted. I will take it later.
I have received the following letter from the Secretary of State:
"Under the Northern Ireland (Elections) Act 1998 it is my responsibility to determine at what times the Assembly shall meet. In accordance with the schedule to that Act, I hereby direct that the Assembly shall meet from 15July at 10.30am until 30July at 6.00pm."
I will take your point of order now, MrRobinson.

Mr Peter Robinson: Mr Initial Presiding Officer, can you assure the Assembly that the notification that you have just read was communicated to every party in the Assembly and that the Ulster Unionists, in particular, are aware that the Assembly is meeting? We need to know that they knew about the sitting but did not want to come and take a stand to exclude Sinn Féin from the Executive.

Lord Alderdice: All reasonable precautions were taken to ensure that all Members and all parties were informed, and I have no reason to believe that any were not.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Further to that point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Would it be correct to conclude that the First Minister (Designate) had, of course, been informed that the Assembly was meeting?

Lord Alderdice: I have nothing to add to my previous comment. Under Initial Standing Order 22(2)(b), notice of a motion under Standing Order 24(1) or (2) requires the Presiding Officer to defer the procedure for the appointment of Ministers (Designate) until the Assembly has voted on that motion but, subsequent to that vote, requires him immediately to proceed. I have received such a notice of motion.
Before taking the motion, I wish to make two rulings which shall apply to this first item of business.
First, while giving notice of a motion under Standing Order24 has no specific requirements, the moving of such a motion requires that one of three criteria must be met. These criteria are set out under Standing Order 24(5). As I have received no notice under Standing Order 24 5(b) or (c) I shall invite the proposer to provide evidence that criterion (a) is met. I will accept written notice bearing the signature of 30Members, or the support of 30Members demonstrated by their rising in their places, or both.
If this criterion is met the motion may be moved and the debate will proceed. If it is not met I will not allow the motion to be moved and the procedure for the appointment of Ministers (Designate) shall immediately proceed as required by Standing Order22(2).
In either event my second ruling shall apply. It is that, once commenced, the procedure under Standing Order22 will not be interrupted except by leave of the Assembly or in terms described by Standing Order22(7) where a nominating officer requests a brief adjournment. This second ruling is based on the practice described in ‘Erskine May’, page319, which explains that an order of the day must be proceeded with, arranged for a future day or discharged. In the case of the Order Paper, and specifically item3, it is clear that the first option only is available to the Assembly. If those rulings are clear I shall proceed.

Sinn Féin: Motion for Exclusion

The following motion stood on the Order Paper in the names of Rev Dr Ian Paisley and Mr P Robinson:
This Assembly resolves that SinnFéin does not enjoy the confidence of the Assembly because it is not committed to non-violence and exclusively peaceful and democratic means and, therefore, consistent with Standing Order24(2)(a), determines that members of SinnFéin shall be excluded from holding office as Ministers or Ministers (Designate) for a period of 12months beginning with the date of this resolution.

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Mr Initial PresidingOfficer. I require clarification with regard to Standing Order24(5). As we have provided evidence that 29Members support this motion, do you require evidence of the support of just one more Member for a debate to go forward? And is it the case that the thirtieth person need not be someone who will vote for the motion at the end, but simply one who is prepared as a democrat to have it debated? Any Member, even though he does not intend to support the content of the motion at the end of the debate, can, in order that we may have a debate, rise in his place and indicate support for it.

Lord Alderdice: You have explained the position. I do not disagree with what you have said.

Mr Cedric Wilson: Further to that point of order, MrInitial Presiding Officer. I ask you to confirm that this motion stands in the name of 29Members, representing the Democratic Unionist Party, the United Kingdom Unionist Party, the Northern Ireland Unionist Party, the United Unionist Assembly Group and one Ulster Unionist, MrPeterWeir. Isn’t it a united Unionist motion which has the full support of this side of the House?

Lord Alderdice: I cannot confirm that. The position is that there are 28names in support of the motion. There were 29. Therefore I must ask DrPaisley whether he can satisfy the requirements of Standing Order24(5)(a). Does the motion have the support of 30Members?

Mr Cedric Wilson: Further to that point of order. Before DrPaisley speaks may I ask you —

Lord Alderdice: I am not prepared to take a point of order as I have already asked DrPaisley to respond.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: The best thing for you to do, Sir, is to put the matter to the Assembly to determine the number of supporters. We received no notice from Mr Weir that he had withdrawn.

Lord Alderdice: I currently have 28signatures. I must therefore ask whether there are any Members other than the 28signatories who support the proposal for the moving of this motion. If there are any, will they stand in their places?
Seeing none, I assume that there are not 30Members in support of the motion and that it is therefore not competent and falls.

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Can you rule that this is the only legal mechanism to exclude Sinn Féin from an Executive in Northern Ireland and that the absence of the Ulster Unionist Party ensures that it cannot be triggered?

Lord Alderdice: I am not sure that I can confirm that this is the only legal mechanism. That would be a rather wide-ranging judgement, and therefore I cannot confirm the proposition.

Nomination of Ministers (Designate)

Lord Alderdice: Immediately prior to entering the Chamber, I received a Standing Order, in manuscript form, from the Secretary of State. I have just had it handed to me in typed form, which is rather easier to read. It is an additional initial Standing Order referring to the running of d’Hondt. As it would be improper for me to proceed without Members of the Assembly having had an opportunity to read the Standing Order, I am suspending the sitting for 15minutes so that Members may do so. We shall then proceed forthwith to the appointment of Ministers.

Mr Gerry Adams: On a point of order, a Chathaoirligh. Given the failure of the DUP move to exclude Sinn Féin, can we presume that after this suspension we can move to trigger d’Hondt and nominate Ministers?

Lord Alderdice: You can, MrAdams, but it would be wrong to proceed when a Standing Order has been promulgated which even I have not had an opportunity to study properly. Copies of the Standing Order are available in the Members’ Lobby.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Further to that point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. You have said that d’Hondt will run. I take it that this Standing Order does not prevent that.

Lord Alderdice: I will wish to study it, but, as I understand it, it does not prevent the running of d’Hondt.

Mr Nigel Dodds: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Can you confirm, as a matter of courtesy to Members, when you or your office received a copy of this manuscript Standing Order from the Secretary of State? We have become used to rules being made up as we go along. This is another example, following the procedure that was initiated in the House of Commons. Will you let us know precisely when you received that communication from the Secretary of State?

Lord Alderdice: I received the manuscript amendment just prior to coming into the Chamber — certainly less than half an hour ago. I received the typed form more recently, and it is proper for Members to have an opportunity to read it.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: They do not have copies.

Rev William McCrea: It is the first they have heard of it.

Lord Alderdice: I have asked that it be provided in the Members’ Lobby. We shall try to ensure that it is available. I propose to suspend the sitting for 15minutes. I am in a difficult position but wish to ensure that our proceedings are conducted decently, properly and in order. Copies will be available as soon as possible.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: By leave of the House could we say 30minutes?

Lord Alderdice: I cannot say 30minutes, as I am not entitled to do so under Standing Orders. Fifteen minutes is the maximum that I am permitted. Let us take the 15minutes and address the matter then.
The sitting was suspended at 10.45 am and resumed at 11.02 am.

Lord Alderdice: I trust that all Members have been able to get copies of the additional Standing Order. It is only proper for me to read the letter from the Secretary of State and the additional Standing Order in order to put them on the record. The letter states
"It is my responsibility under paragraph10 of the schedule to the Northern Ireland (Elections) Act 1998 to determine the Standing Orders of the Assembly during the shadow period. It is therefore hereby determined that the Additional Standing Order on the appointment of Ministers (designate), attached below, should become Standing Order22 with immediate effect.
The previous Standing Order22 made on 9July is hereby revoked."
The substance of the change is the addition of paragraph15 and a reference to paragraph15 in section1 of Standing Order22. Members will note that the changed part of the Standing Order reads as follows:
"On the completion of the procedure for the appointment of Ministers (designate) under this Standing Order, the persons appointed shall only continue to hold Ministerial office (designate) if they include at least 3designated Nationalists and 3designated Unionists."
I trust that the Assembly is clear about the new Standing Order.
As required by the Initial Standing Orders, I have, by reference to the party affiliations indicated by Members when taking their seats, published a consolidated list of political parties represented in the Assembly, the Assembly Members belonging to each political party and the nominating officer for each party.
At the sitting of the Assembly on 16February1999 a joint proposal from the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate), relating to the number of ministerial offices to be held by Northern Ireland Ministers and the functions which would be exercisable by the holders of such offices after the appointed day, was agreed with cross-community support.
I am now required by the Initial Standing Orders to conduct the allocation of ministerial offices (designate) in accordance with the procedures that are set out in the Initial Standing Orders. Before commencing, I wish to remind Members of the requirements set out in those Standing Orders. I shall ask the nominating officer of each political party, in the order required by the formula contained in the Initial Standing Orders, to select an available ministerial office (designate) and nominate a person to hold it who is a member of his or her party and of the Assembly.
Should a nominating officer require further time to consider a selection or a nomination, it is open to me to permit a brief suspension. However, if no such request is made, if the nominating officer does not make the selection or nomination required within the maximum period of five minutes, or if the nominee does not take up the selected ministerial office (designate) within that period in accordance with the Initial Standing Orders, I am required to disregard the nominating officer and his party for the purposes of filling the remaining ministerial offices (designate). I will then ask the nominating officer next in line, in accordance with the required formula, to select and nominate. I should also explain that, under the terms of the Initial Standing Orders, the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate) may be nominated to hold ministerial office.
It is also required that Ministers taking up positions affirm the Pledge of Office contained in schedule4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Discussions through the usual channels on the procedure that we should adopt have indicated that it would be helpful if I were to read the Pledge of Office so that it does not have to be read in full by each of the nominated Ministers. The Pledge of Office is as follows:
"To pledge:
(a) to discharge in good faith all the duties of office;
(b) commitment to non-violence and exclusively peaceful and democratic means;
(c) to serve all the people of Northern Ireland equally, and to act in accordance with the general obligations on government to promote equality and prevent discrimination;
(d) to participate with colleagues in the preparation of a programme for government;
(e) to operate within the framework of that programme when agreed within the Executive Committee and endorsed by the Assembly;
(f) to support, and act in accordance with, all decisions of the Executive Committee and Assembly;
(g) to comply with the Ministerial Code of Conduct."
The Ministerial Code of Conduct is also included in schedule4 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
I call on Mr Trimble, as the nominating officer for the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the highest figure, to select a ministerial office (designate) and nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Ulster Unionist Party and of the Assembly.
The Standing Orders require that a response come within fiveminutes.
Five minutes was allowed for a response from MrTrimble

Lord Alderdice: Mr Trimble has not made a nomination within fiveminutes, so I am required by the Standing Orders to disregard the nominating officer of the Ulster Unionist Party and his party for the purposes of filling remaining ministerial offices (designate).
I call on Mr Hume, as the nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of the Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate MrMarkDurkan for the Department of Finance and Personnel.

Lord Alderdice: Will Mr Durkan confirm that he is willing to take up the office?

Mr Mark Durkan: Yes. I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act1998.

Lord Alderdice: Mr Durkan has been appointed Minister (Designate) of Finance and Personnel.
I call on Dr Paisley, as the nominating officer of the political party to which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Democratic Unionist Party and of the Assembly.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Mr Initial Presiding Officer, you informed me that I could have a 15-minute suspension. I want that 15minutes.

Lord Alderdice: As I said earlier, a nominating officer has the right to call for a 15-minute suspension in order to consult with colleagues. The sitting is therefore suspended for 15minutes.
The sitting was suspended at 11.15 am and resumed at 11.30 am.

Lord Alderdice: I call on DrPaisley to make his nomination.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley remained seated.

Lord Alderdice: I remind DrPaisley that he has fiveminutes left in which to make his nomination and that any nominee will have to affirm the pledge within that time.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: In order to oust SinnFéin from office, in keeping with the wishes of the majority of the Unionist people, I refuse to nominate.

Lord Alderdice: I call on MrGerry Adams, as the nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of SinnFéin and of the Assembly.

Mr Gerry Adams: Tá mé buíoch duit, a Chathaoirligh. Ainmním Bairbre de Brún mar Aire Enterprise Trade and Investment.

Lord Alderdice: I must ask that you make the nomination in English also, as it has to be made before the Assembly. [Interruption]

Mr Gerry Adams: Thank you. Thanks for your encouragement, Gentlemen.
I want to nominate BairbredeBrún as Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment.

Lord Alderdice: Will MsdeBrún confirm that she is willing to take up this office?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Cinntím sin, agus dearbhaím gealltanais na h-oifige mar atá siad leagtha amach i sceideal 4 don Acht um Thuaisceart Éireann1998.
I can confirm that, and I affirm the pledge of office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act1998.

Lord Alderdice: MsBairbredeBrún is now appointed as Minister (Designate) of Enterprise, Trade and Investment.
I call on MrJohnHume, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of the Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate Mr Sean Farren as Minister for Regional Development.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrFarren confirm that he is willing to take up the office?

Dr Sean Farren: Cinntím — agus tá áthas orm — an gealltanas sin a thabhairt.
I affirm the pledge of office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act1998.

Lord Alderdice: MrFarren is now appointed Minister (Designate) for Regional Development.
I call on MrGerryAdams, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of SinnFéin and of the Assembly.

Mr Gerry Adams: Maith thú. Tá mé buíoch duit arís, agus ainmním MartinMcGuinness mar Aire Agriculture agus Rural Development.
I thank you again, and I nominate Martin McGuinness as Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrMcGuinness confirm that he is willing to take up this office?

Mr Martin McGuinness: Tá. Yes. I affirm the pledge of office.

Lord Alderdice: MrMcGuinness is appointed as Minister (Designate) of Agriculture and Rural Development.
I call on MrJohnHume, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of the Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate Ms Brid Rodgers as Minister of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment.

Lord Alderdice: Will MsBridRodgers confirm that she is willing to take up this office?

Ms Brid Rodgers: Cinntím go nglacaim leis an ghealltanas mar atá leagtha amach i sceideal 4 in Acht Thuaisceart na h-Éireann 1998.
I affirm the pledge of office as set out in schedule4 to the Northern Ireland Act1998.

Lord Alderdice: MsBridRodgers is now appointed Minister (Designate) of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment.
I call on MrSeanNeeson, as the nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Alliance Party and of the Assembly.

Mr Sean Neeson: When I came into the building this morning it was my intention to nominate if this procedure were moving forward. However, I refuse to do so because of the unforgivable absence of the Ulster Unionists and the outrageous Standing Order, which states
"On the completion of the procedure for the appointment of Ministers (designate) under this standing order, the persons appointed shall only continue to hold Ministerial office (designate) if they include at least three designated Nationalists and three designated Unionists".
I and my party are not prepared to be made patsies through any outrageous act by the Government, and I do not intend to nominate anyone.

Lord Alderdice: I call on MrGerry Adams, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of Sinn Féin and of this Assembly.

Mr Gerry Adams: Ainmním Pat Doherty mar Aire Oideachais.
I wish to nominate MrPatDoherty as Minister of Education.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrDoherty confirm that he is willing to take office?

Mr Pat Doherty: Cinntím go nglacaim.
I affirm the pledge of office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act 1998.

Lord Alderdice: MrDoherty is now appointed Minister (Designate) of Education.
I call on MrJohnHume, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of this Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate MrEddieMcGrady as Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

Mr Eddie McGrady: Mr Initial Presiding Officer, I do not accept the nomination.

Lord Alderdice: I return to the nominating officer, MrHume, to ask if he has a further nomination in regard to this or any other portfolio.

Mr John Hume: I nominate DrJoeHendron as Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.

Lord Alderdice: Will DrHendron confirm that he is willing to take up this office?

Dr Joe Hendron: I so confirm, and I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act 1998.

Lord Alderdice: DrJoeHendron is now appointed as Minister (Designate) of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.
I now call on MrRobertMcCartney QC, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the United Kingdom Unionist Party and of this Assembly.

Mr Robert McCartney: It comes as a shock to me that DrJoeHendron accepted his nomination and is willing to share power, in the light of the treatment he was afforded at the hands of Sinn Féin in the 1992 election. As a democrat, under no circumstances would I consider for a second nominating either myself or anyone else in my party to sit in an Executive with two members of the IRA Army Council, MrMcGuinness and MrPat Doherty. I refuse to make any nominations.

Lord Alderdice: I call on MrJohn Hume, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of this Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate MrDenisHaughey as Minister for Social Development.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrHaughey confirm that he is willing to take up the office?

Mr Denis Haughey: A Chathaoirligh, I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act 1998.

Lord Alderdice: MrHaughey is appointed as Minister (Designate) for Social Development.
I now call on MrGerryAdams, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of Sinn Féin and of this Assembly.

Mr Gerry Adams: Ainmím Mary Nelis mar Aire Culture, Arts agus Leisure. I nominate MaryNelis as Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrsMaryNelis confirm that she is willing to take up this office?

Ms Mary Nelis: Yes, a Chathaoirligh, and I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act 1998.

Lord Alderdice: MrsMaryNelis is now appointed Minister (Designate) of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
I now call on MrJohnHume, as nominating officer of the political party for which the formula laid down in Standing Orders gives the next-highest figure, to select a ministerial portfolio and to nominate a person to hold it who is a member of the Social Democratic and Labour Party and of this Assembly.

Mr John Hume: I nominate MrAlbanMaginness as Minister of the Environment.

Lord Alderdice: Will MrAlban Maginness confirm that he is willing to take up the office?

Mr Alban Maginness: I so confirm, and I affirm the Pledge of Office as set out in schedule4 to the NorthernIreland Act 1998.

Lord Alderdice: MrAlbanMaginness is now Minister (Designate) of the Environment.
That concludes the process for the appointment of Ministers (Designate). However, I must draw to the attention of the Assembly that under Standing Order22(15), determined this day, the persons appointed shall continue to hold ministerial office (designate) only if they include at least three designated Nationalists and three designated Unionists. The designations have been published, and it is clear that under this Standing Order the appointments cannot continue.

Personal Statement

Mr Seamus Mallon: May I thank you, Mr Presiding Officer, for giving me the opportunity to make a personal statement to the Assembly.
On 1July1998 I was honoured to be elected, on a cross-community basis, as the Deputy First Minister (Designate) to serve all the people of NorthernIreland. On taking that office I affirmed my commitment to non-violence and exclusively peaceful and democratic means; my opposition to any use of force by others for any political purpose; my commitment to work in good faith to bring into being the arrangements set out in the Good Friday Agreement; and my commitment to observe the spirit of the Pledge of Office. I have tried to the best of my ability to do that.
Since 1 July I have worked with the two Governments, my party and all the other parties to give effect to that pledge. For over a year the fundamental institutional elements of that agreement have not been implemented. We have all benefited from unparalleled time, support and energy from the Prime Minister, TonyBlair, and the Taoiseach, BertieAhern, and, though it has become fashionable in recent weeks to criticise the Secretary of State, the reality is that without her efforts, her willingness to think the unthinkable and her resolve we would never have had the Good Friday Agreement.
The key element of the pledge which was taken by the First Minister and myself was our commitment to work in good faith to bring into being the institutions set out in the Good Friday Agreement. That agreement received overwhelming support in Ireland, North and South, Unionist and Nationalist, in the referenda of 22May1998. That overwhelming support endures, despite the frustrations of implementation and the limitations of leadership. Since 1July, deadline after deadline has been missed: 31October, the day specified for the inaugural meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council; 10March1999; Hillsborough; Downing Street; Castle Buildings; ‘The Way Forward’; and the legislation to ensure the fail-safe clause. Permutation after permutation has been tried. We have tried, and I have tried, every move in the book and outside it to ensure that this agreement worked and that the institutions were set up.
On 2July1999, in ‘The Way Forward’ document presented by the two Prime Ministers, the Governments set out the best possible way of resolving this impasse. It embodies principles that I have always espoused. First, that decommissioning is not a prior condition in the Good Friday Agreement. Secondly, that it is an obligation under the Good Friday Agreement. Reflecting this in ‘The Way Forward’, the Governments set out three commitments agreed by all the parties: an inclusive Executive exercising devolved powers; decommissioning of all paramilitary arms by May2000; and decommissioning to be carried out in a manner determined by the International Commission on Decommissioning.
Most importantly, in order to provide reassurance, the Governments agreed a fail-safe clause. It provided that if decommissioning were not carried out as specified by the International Commission all institutions would be suspended. It also provided that if there were no inclusive Executive all institutions would similarly be suspended. This reflects guarantees that I gave at our party conference last November — one to Unionists in the event that decommissioning did not occur and one to Sinn Féin in the event that the Executive was not truly inclusive. Those two guarantees were rooted in the conviction that those who reneged on the agreement could not expect to continue in office. Both are now formally copper-fastened in this fail-safe clause.
However, the Ulster Unionist Party says that that is not enough. It used this crisis to get more concessions out of two sovereign Governments in order to bleed the process dry. They stand by their demand for prior decommissioning — a condition that is found nowhere in the agreement, and one that is alien to its principles.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. Is this a personal statement or is it going to the heart of a debate that we were not allowed to have? It goes far beyond a personal statement.

Lord Alderdice: It is a personal statement. I am considering two or three questions as to how we conduct ourselves immediately thereafter.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: I intend to ask for the right to comment.

Lord Alderdice: I am not shocked.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: Further to that point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. How much time does the Deputy First Minister (Designate) have for his personal statement?

Lord Alderdice: The Deputy First Minister (Designate) is making a personal statement which I believe to be of some importance to the Assembly.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: On a further point of order.

Lord Alderdice: I am not taking any further points of order at this stage. It is for me to decide when to take points of order. I shall take this one after the Deputy First Minister has resumed his seat.

Mr Seamus Mallon: Thank you, Mr Presiding Officer. I insisted, with your permission, that I do the House the courtesy of making my statement here and not elsewhere. I shall continue.
The Ulster Unionists stand by their demand for prior decommissioning — a condition that is not found in the Good Friday Agreement, and one that is alien to its principles. What they are doing is worse than failing to operate an inclusive Executive: they are actually preventing its creation. They are dishonouring this agreement; they are insulting its principles.
Over the past year more space has been sought and more given, and on each occasion more space is required. More time is then needed and more understanding of the difficulties, real or imaginary, that are faced. The best efforts of two Governments and of the parties, even in recent days, have borne no fruit. I speak not just of my efforts as Deputy First Minister but also of those of the Secretary of State, the Prime Minister, the Taoiseach and the President of the United States. When, in the past, could we have had such support? When can we hope to have such support again? It is a matter of genuine regret that others could not, and did not, respond to their relentless efforts. There has been visit after visit and meeting after meeting day after day. Regrettably — and I say this more in sorrow than in anger — those efforts have been not just spurned but scorned.
It is now clear that the two Governments will have to initiate a review under the terms of this agreement. They must ensure that that review is not a means to buy time for any political party but the fundamental review envisaged in the agreement. Everyone must go into it as an equal. I and the SDLP will co-operate fully with the review under those terms, without the trappings of office or the benefits of title. That review is now the future of the political process. If the leader of the Ulster Unionists wishes to speak for his party in the review he should do so as its leader and only as its leader. He cannot do so from the privileged position of First Minister of the Assembly.
The agreement does not belong to any individual or party. It belongs to the people. They voted for it. They own it. Consistent with my pledge, I am obliged to uphold it on their behalf. For that reason, and that reason alone, I have concluded that it is my overriding responsibility to uphold, above all else, the democratic will of the people of Ireland, North and South, expressed, as never before, in the referenda of May1998 endorsing the Good Friday Agreement.
It is now necessary that I resign as Deputy First Minister. I wish to inform the Assembly that, accordingly, I offer my resignation now, with immediate effect. It was this Assembly that elected me to that position, and it is essential that I announce my resignation to the Assembly. I do this with great reluctance and with a recognition of the awesome responsibility that we all have towards lasting peace and the future of all of the people of NorthernIreland. I now believe that this is the only way in which I can ensure that a meaningful review of aspects of the agreement will be carried out and that, subsequently, a fully inclusive Executive can be created on the basis of cross-community support.
I thank you, Mr Presiding Officer, and Members of the Assembly for your indulgence towards me. They may now understand why I had to be a little long-winded. I hope that I have made it clear that I respect each and every person in the House and the views of them all. I do not treat the Assembly with contempt.
12.00

Lord Alderdice: I have one or two comments about that personal statement. First, points of order are not usually taken during a personal statement. That is why I left them to the end. Secondly, it seems to me — I have to make this decision on the hoof — that the personal statement by the now former Deputy First Minister (Designate) was of such substance and importance that the party leaders in the Chamber ought to have an opportunity to respond to it. MrAdams has already indicated his wish to speak, and he will therefore be called next.
I have received an indication from the Secretary of State that she wishes to confer with me, but I have sent back advice that the party leaders in the House ought first to have an opportunity to make their comments. As you know, we have a remit from the Secretary of State under the Elections Act, but I have sought her indulgence to enable us to continue for the present.
Usually there is no time limit on personal statements, but there is still a limit of 10 minutes on speeches generally.
I will now take the point of order from MrIan PaisleyJnr, and then we will proceed to the party leaders. MrAdams will be called first.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: I intimated to you that I was unhappy about this and wanted to speak about it. Why are you calling someone from across the House when I am the one who raised the matter with you?

Mr Mitchel McLaughlin: We were first.

Lord Alderdice: I am not aware of that. MrAdams indicated to me before the Deputy First Minister (Designate) spoke that he too wanted to speak, and the Deputy First Minister (Designate) himself had already raised the question with me.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. I wanted clarification on how much time you intended to allow the Deputy First Minister to indulge in his statement. You gave him 10minutes and fiveseconds.
It is interesting that he refused to say anything about the guns of the Provisional IRA. Maybe if he had taken a stand on that issue he would not have had to resign today because we would have had a Government without Provisionals.

Lord Alderdice: That is not a point of order, and I have already answered the substance — if there was such — of the point you have made. There is not usually a time limit on personal statements.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: I do not understand this. A Member is told that something is to happen and asks you if he may speak afterwards, and he is called before the House even knows that that has happened. None of the rest of us knew. I was not told, as the leader of the third-largest party, that there was to be a statement. I was not afforded that courtesy, so I was not able to ask beforehand to speak. However, I asked in the middle of the speech — as soon as I could.
If it had been a personal statement MrAdams would have had to be ruled out of order because there is no debate on a personal statement. But because this deteriorated into a savage attack on people who have different principles from those of the hon Gentleman we are having a debate. If it had been a personal statement you would have had to rule that MrAdams could not be called. That is my argument, and I should be called first on this issue.

Lord Alderdice: There are a number of incorrect presumptions in the Member’s statements. I do not think that it is for me to parse those bits which are correct and those which are incorrect. I have sought from the Secretary of State the opportunity for party leaders to make their comments before the Assembly is suspended.

Mr Robert McCartney: The leader of the Democratic Unionist Party has made a valid point in relation to the information that is available to the Assembly. Is there any reason for departing in these circumstances from the convention that has been established in this House that the leaders of parties speak in accordance with party strengths? That principle, if applied here, would cut across all the arguments, debates and suggestions about some people being informed while others were not. It is a solid principle upon which you, MrInitial Presiding Officer, should stand.

Lord Alderdice: Again, you are repeating an incorrect assumption. The request from MrAdams to speak was not on the basis of the statement. He made his request at an earlier stage.

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, MrInitial Presiding Officer. It would be helpful if you were to give some direction to the House on the procedures arising from the personal statement. Which Standing Order covers the issues of resignation and reappointment? Does the position of the First Minister (Designate) automatically fall as a result of the resignation of the Deputy First Minister (Designate)? Was that resignation given to you in writing? Does it have to be in writing? If so, may we have copies of it? We need answers to these questions so that we can put this issue in its proper context.

Lord Alderdice: I shall answer the questions as best I can. There is no requirement for the First Minister (Designate) or the Deputy First Minister (Designate) to put his resignation in writing prior to devolution. The appointments fall under the Initial Standing Orders under the Elections Act — they are not under the substantive Standing Orders which would exist under the Northern Ireland Act — and so there is no need for resignations to be given in writing. This resignation has not been given in writing, and you have heard the statement. The only written version will be in the Official Report.
Members will recall that the First Minister (Designate) and the Deputy First Minister (Designate) were elected — I use the common parlance — "on a slate". Were we in a post-devolution situation and operating under the Northern IrelandAct both positions would fall when one Minister resigned, but the remaining individual would continue in a caretaker capacity for up to sixweeks. Before the end of that period the Presiding Officer would call for a further election. However, we are still functioning under the NorthernIreland (Elections) Act for these purposes, and therefore the position of the First Minister (Designate), as I understand it — and you have simply asked me for an immediate view — is unchanged. It is possible that some Standing Order, or other arrangement, is already on the way, but I have no knowledge of it.

Mr Gerry Adams: The point of order of which I gave notice before IanPaisley spoke was about the absence of the First Minister (Designate). In order to shorten this farce, I am prepared to give way to IanPaisley if he wishes to speak before me. I would, with your indulgence, speak as party leader after that.

Lord Alderdice: I am grateful to you for —

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: I want to speak as of right in this House.

Lord Alderdice: MrAdams has indicated that he is prepared to give way. Does DrPaisley want to accept?
As it is clear that the Member does not accept, we must proceed.

Mr Peter Robinson: On a point of order, Mr Initial Presiding Officer. It is not in the gift of any Member to give way to someone other than in debate. My hon Friend the Member for NorthAntrim is perfectly entitled to stand in his own right when you call him to do so. That is what he is asking for. He is not prepared to accept the grace and favour of a member of the army council of the IRA.

Lord Alderdice: I am simply trying, if people are being courteous to each other, to convey those courtesies backwards and forwards. It is not for me to make judgements on the motives of any Member; it is for me simply to conduct the business. I call MrAdams. MrHume, DrPaisley and others will then be called in the usual order.
I remind Members that we now come under the 10-minute rule.

Mr Gerry Adams: Tá mé buíoch duit arís, agus tá brón orm nach dtug IanPaisley an seans domhsa a thug mise dósan. Tá mé lán-chinnte go mbeidh brón agus fearg ar a lán daoine nuair a chluinfeas siad faoi imeachtaí an lae inniu san áit seo. Tá an-bhrón orm féin agus ar Shinn Féin faoin a raibh le rá ag Séamus Mallon. Rinne SéamusMallon a dhícheall. Ní aontaím leis i gcónaí — sin mar atá an saol — ach mar a dúirt mé, rinne sé a dhícheall mar leas-Chéad Aire ainmnithe.
Many people will be very angry and very sorry at the farce that we have seen here today. Many people will be saddened at SeamusMallon’s statement of resignation. While he and I did not agree all of the time, he did his best. And we can expect no more from people than that they do their best. I want to pay tribute to the way he conducted himself as Deputy First Minister (Designate).
I was rising to make a point about MrTrimble’s deliberate absence from here and about all the efforts that have been made by many people — by the two Governments, some of the parties here, the President and the former President of SouthAfrica and the President of the USA, but more importantly, perhaps, by the people of this island, north and south, who voted for the agreement.
There will be young people at university or working in England or Scotland today who have decided not to come home. There will be young people listening to or watching these proceedings — mostly Unionists — deciding to leave and not come back. There will be business people deciding not to invest.
I am sure that at a personal level DrPaisley is a nice man. I am sure that as a husband, as a father, as a grandfather and even when with his colleagues he can be charming, affectionate and funny. But here, in terms of his leadership of a section of our people and of the type of climate and politics that he has been involved in throughout his adult life — in particular the last 30years — his behaviour has been disgraceful.
The absence of the UUP, and especially of the First Minister (Designate), is also disgraceful.
The Good Friday Agreement was a compromise. It was a compromise between all the elements on this island, particularly those in the North. The people of a Unionist view — those within civic Unionism, those within community activism, those within the main Protestant churches and those in the business community — must this morning feel disappointed at what happened yesterday in GlengallStreet. The only reason the UUP moved to GlengallStreet is that they can be sure that no Nationalist can get in there. They can be sure that no Catholic can get in there.
This is not about guns and the hero of Clontibret and the founder of Ulster Resistance and those who were involved in all the different armed organisations over the last 30years. We have only to think of the career of BrianNelson and the current attacks on isolated Catholics and Nationalists, with weapons brought in by him, some of which were brought in by Ulster Resistance. We have only to think of all of that.
It would be easy to give vent to justifiable and righteous anger, but let me look to the future. We have placed firmly on the record our position in relation to the British Government’s handling of recent developments. But if the Unionists think that the equality agenda is going to disappear they are mistaken. The equality agenda is only beginning. If the Unionists think that they are going to hold on to the RUC they are mistaken. We still need a new policing service for all the people of this state. If Unionists think that human-rights legislation will not be enacted nor a human-rights regime created and that all the other social, economic, cultural and political matters will not proceed they are sorely mistaken. MrBlair and the Taoiseach, MrAhern, have a huge responsibility to proceed, to develop and move forward on all the other aspects of the agreement.
I am an Irish Republican, and as the executive leader of Sinn Féin I had to lead the party into this Chamber. That was a huge step for us to take. It was a huge step in trying to face up to our responsibilities. I believe in the Irish national flag, in peace and equality between Orange — in this month of the Orange — and Green. I believe that, despite the best efforts of our Colleagues on the opposite Bench and those Colleagues who are absent, we will bring about on this island the type of society in which young people can grow up free from sectarian hatred and imprisonment and, yes, free from violence.
I have acknowledged all the hurt that all of us have both inflicted and endured. The Members on this Bench survived "bloody Sunday" and, on 5October, Duke Street. We have been CS-gassed; we have been CR-gassed; we have been plastic-bulleted; we have been in H-blocks; we have been on prison ships; and we have been in prison cells. As we conclude this little farce, we still look for sensible, positive Unionism to grasp the opportunity to take its place with the rest of us on this island, in harmony, in justice and in peace with each other.
Tá mé buíoch duit as an seans seo a thabhairt domh labhairt inniu. Ba mhaith liom mo bhrón a chur in iúl gur chuir an tUasal Mallon an ráiteas seo amach inniu.
Thank you, Sir, for your patience and for this opportunity to pay tribute to SeamusMallon for the way he has behaved. I regret that he has felt it necessary to resign, and I think that MrTrimble’s position is now totally untenable.

Mr John Hume: I would like to express my deep gratitude and congratulations to Seamus on the honourable statement that he has made. He was clearly underlining our complete commitment to the creation of totally inclusive institutions that bring together all sections of our people. I think that I speak for the majority of people in Northern Ireland, right across the divide, in expressing appreciation for the enormous amount of detailed work that he has done as Deputy First Minister in difficult circumstances and under great pressure. As the review takes place, we look forward to using all our energies to ensure that the agreement is implemented in all its detail.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: A personal statement on a resignation in another place would be listened to, and there would be no debate on it. Usually, party leaders would know that it was going to take place, but I had no knowledge of this one. I have no objection to any Member, let alone the Deputy First Minister, exercising his rights.
I remind MrMallon that my party did not vote for him, that he had no support from us. When he was elected we knew where he stood and what his principles and aims were. We said that we would be concentrating totally on opposing his aims. He knew that well. I have nothing further to say with regard to his statement. However, he took the opportunity to launch a broadside upon those Members with principles — principles that they will not forgo regardless of the cost.
I welcome the derogatory remarks made by GerryAdams. I would not like him to say "Well done, Ian". He has said "Well done, David", but he is not so inclined to say "Well done, David" today. I know that the IRA bombers and killers hate me and that I am on their hit list. On two occasions they have attempted to kill me. I know all about that. It does not concern me one iota.
But today the Member has maligned the people of Northern Ireland. I represent the majority of Unionists in Northern Ireland. I speak as their mandated leader, and he has to realise that the dealings with other factions of Unionism are over. Unionism is coming together at the grassroots and is beginning to exercise its strength, and he had better realise that it is not the type of Unionism that runs away. We were told that we ran away from talks. We did not. We said that we would not be there when the gunmen came into the talks. MrMcCartney’s party said the same thing. We kept to our mandate. We would have been dishonest if we had not done that. We did not run away.
On this crucial day, when the voice of united Unionism should have been heard, the main Unionist party is not here because MrTrimble is attempting to hold on to office. That is what this is about — people who are prepared to sell their souls for office. I am not in that business. I have always been prepared to put my beliefs in my manifesto. People have hated and cursed me for that and have said that it is terrible, but I have always been honest. I have said what they will get if they vote for me.
Today I say to the House that we all have to heed the ballot box. GerryAdams is not prepared to do that because the ballot box in this country declares clearly that the people do not want those involved in violence in the Government of NorthernIreland.
I have a list of the people who have been murdered in the past year. Who murdered them? The IRA. It will take more than BertieAhern’s wriggling to tell the people of Northern Ireland that the IRA is different from SinnFéin. They are the same. I am not the only one to say that; both parties in the UnitedKingdom Parliament have preached using the words "inextricably linked" from the Front Benches.
When they were told to look up the word "inextricably" they said that they did not want to do so. It means that the organisations are one and the same. Indeed they are one and the same. When MrAdams looks at his beard in the morning — not to shave, but to check that he has washed it properly — he says to himself "Am I GerryAdams, the leader of the IRA, or am I Gerry Adams, leader of Sinn Féin? I am going to the Assembly today, so I must be the leader of Sinn Féin." Or he might say "I am going to south Armagh today, so I must be the leader of the IRA." They are one and the same thing.
The people of Northern Ireland gave their verdict a few days ago. They said that they would not tolerate having people who are associated with paramilitary organisations, and who are carrying out these murders, in the Government of Northern Ireland. IRA/Sinn Féin is the only such organisation which, under this legislation, is in a position to enter the Government. Those Unionists who did not run away have today been able to derail this whole process, to bury it in a Sadducee’s grave, from which there can be no resurrection.
It was very insulting for the Secretary of State to call this meeting and run the d’Hondt system today. It was also insulting for the Government to say that they would delay the legislation at Westminster, while pushing this process through here. Did the SDLP and Sinn Féin really think that they could push it through? It is a farce. It is no wonder that the Member for South Down refused to take part by accepting a nomination. Then his colleague resigned as Deputy First Minister (Designate). Why did we have to go through this farce? We had people being congratulated and applauded on their appointment to ministerial posts which they were to hold for only 10 or 15minutes. What will the people of NorthernIreland think of the House today? Everyone will know that we were engaged in a farce.
The Irish Republican Army has continued to kill with impunity. MrFarren, who is very eloquent on the subject of Dunloy but not so eloquent when his constituents are beaten up by the IRA, will be interested to know of an attack which took place a few days ago. Having beaten up a man, the IRA wrecked his car and his house, before going to his son’s house and attacking him as well. On their way home they broke the windows in the Free Presbyterian church. This is the sort of violence we can expect from IRA/Sinn Féin and which we are asked to put up with.
In the last 12months there have been 46shootings and 119beatings and mutilations. These attacks were carried out not by Loyalists — who have attacked people, and whom I condemn utterly — but by the IRA. In west Belfast there have been 22shootings and 27beatings; in east Belfast, fourshootings and 25beatings; in north Belfast, fiveshootings and 24beatings; in south Belfast, twoshootings and 12beatings; in Armagh, fourshootings and 10beatings; in Strabane, no shootings but 11beatings; in Londonderry, fiveshootings and fourbeatings; in Dungannon, no shootings but twobeatings; in Cookstown, oneshooting and twobeatings; in Lisnaskea, oneshooting and onebeating; in Downpatrick, oneshooting and onebeating; and a man was shot in England.

Lord Alderdice: Please bring your remarks to a close.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: These are IRA atrocities which have taken place in the last 12months.
MrInitial Presiding Officer, I am amazed that you would try to stop me. Far worse things have been said by others. But maybe it is the time factor.

Lord Alderdice: It is the time factor. I must ask you to draw your remarks to a close.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Today has been a good day for Northern Ireland. Democracy has triumphed. There are no IRA men in the Government of Northern Ireland.

Mr Sean Neeson: First of all, I pay tribute to the Deputy First Minister (Designate). I have always believed him to be an honourable man, and during the course of the last year he has carried out his duties with great honour. Sadly, I cannot say the same of those colleagues who are absent, or to those who, with their jibes and sneers during Mr Mallon’s speech, did no honour to the Assembly today. Unlike DrPaisley, I think this is a very sad day for the Assembly and for the people of Northern Ireland, particularly the 72% who last year voted "Yes" for the Good Friday Agreement. Those people who came out in such numbers to vote in favour of the agreement must feel betrayed by the absence of the Ulster Unionists from this Chamber today.
The Good Friday Agreement is not dead. My party is totally committed to that accord, which we signed last year. I recognise that because of today’s events it is now inevitable that we will go into review, but the important thing, as far as I am concerned, is that the agreement is still alive.
In recent months we have attempted to move this process forward to honour the wishes of the vast majority of people in Northern Ireland and to create a power-sharing devolved Government. The Ulster Unionists jumped at the opportunity of signing the Hillsborough declaration, which, in fact, committed paramilitaries to token decommissioning. I believe that the joint statement, ‘The Way Forward’, made by the two Governments at Castle Buildings gave much stronger commitments, not only in relation to devolution but also with regard to the very thorny issue of decommissioning. I cannot comprehend why the Ulster Unionists could jump at the Hillsborough declaration but could not find a way to accept ‘The Way Forward’. It is essential that the pro-agreement parties stick together to ensure that the process moves forward. It can, if we all act collectively.
The former Deputy First Minister (Designate) referred to the meeting on 1July last year. I firmly believe — and I am sure many colleagues in this Chamber today agree — that we should have moved then to establish the Executive, to set up the various Committees and to appoint Chairpersons, Deputy Chairpersons, and so forth. The failure to do so has created the problems we now face.
I regret that we missed the deadlines in July and October. We had a golden opportunity to move the process forward in the interests of all the people of NorthernIreland by implementing ‘The Way Forward’. One thing that concerns me greatly is that we are now creating a political vacuum. We all know that a political vacuum will allow dissidents on all sides to undermine the democratic process. Even in my constituency of East Antrim there have been a huge number of sectarian attacks in recent months. I believe that people who are opposed to the Good Friday Agreement will try to fill the vacuum that has been created.
We are in great danger of losing the international goodwill that has been created since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. I am quite sure that TonyBlair and BertieAhern are fed up with the shenanigans of recent weeks. There is a serious danger of our losing goodwill, not only in the BritishIsles but also on the international scene.

Mr Gregory Campbell: On a point of order, MrInitial Presiding Officer. I do not know how long the leader of the Alliance Party intends to go on, but, given the failure of the clock to indicate how long he has been speaking, could you enlighten us as to how long he has left?

Lord Alderdice: My apologies. We have had a problem with the clock. He commenced at 12.30pm.

Mr Sean Neeson: To my left I see no victors in the events that are unravelling here today. But there are big losers — my children and your children. They must feel betrayed.

Mr Roger Hutchinson: I can speak for my children. They are delighted.

Mr Sean Neeson: I believe that those children must feel betrayed by their politicians, for we have failed to move forward and create the institutions which so many people in NorthernIreland crave.

Rev William McCrea: On a point of order, MrInitial Presiding Officer. Is it in order for any Member to attribute opinions to our families? My family had a right to vote in the election, and they proudly voted "No".

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: The IRA tried to kill the lot of them.

Lord Alderdice: I am reasonably generous on points of order. One may make all sorts of attributions in political speeches without necessarily being out of parliamentary order. Please continue, MrNeeson.

Mr Sean Neeson: I thought that it was a secret ballot. How does MrMcCrea know what way his children voted, unless he dictates to them as well? [Interruption]
I hope that the two Governments will now move with speed to hold the review and that there will be consultation with the parties in the Assembly so that we can give some hope to the 72% of the electorate in NorthernIreland who last year voted "Yes". The Good Friday Agreement is still alive and kicking.

Mr Cedric Wilson: Members entering the Chamber this morning will have walked past a plaque on the wall immediately outside. The inscription on the plaque reads
"In memory of EdgarSamuelDavidGraham, Assembly Member for Belfast South 1982-83, shot by terrorists on 7December1983"
It finishes with a simple charge to all who believe in the democratic process:
"Keep alive the light of justice".
The RUC officer who trained EdgarGraham in the use of a personal firearm, just weeks before his untimely murder, told me that he would not have known what hit him, for it happened so quickly and was done from behind, in a cowardly fashion. Members here today know what hit EdgarGraham, and who organised the attack. I sat this morning, with my head bowed, as we witnessed an attempt by Her Majesty’s Government to place in positions of power those who signed MrGraham’s death warrant. Those who, this morning, were put forward for positions in the Government of Northern Ireland have been responsible for terrorising the very community over which they were to exercise authority.
My party has played its part in keeping alive "the light of justice" in the Chamber today. We refuse to accept in government those who have been responsible for terrorising this community. Members who were proposed for office today sit on the IRA’s army council and have been directly involved. The message that goes round the world today should not be that Unionists are refusing to share power with Roman Catholics or Nationalists; it is just that we refuse to have unreconstructed terrorists in the Government of NorthernIreland (people who — to use the Prime Minister’s description — are inextricably linked to private armies).
It ill behoves MrMallon to lecture this side of the House about democracy. We have seen what has been described as the pan-Nationalist front standing to applaud, in unison, the election of those nominated for office here this morning. I hope that those pictures have gone across the world. MrMallon and MrHume should seriously consider amending the name of their party to remove the word "Democratic". It is an affront to democracy and justice for them to stand with those on the other side whom they know, as MrMcCartney has—

Mr Danny O'Connor: Is it in order for MrWilson to talk about democracy when two Members from his party were themselves helped in the election by former terrorists?

Lord Alderdice: My comments about political attribution apply also to this point of order.

Mr Cedric Wilson: Today we have seen the unholy alliance which has developed between the SDLP and Sinn Féin/IRA. It is sad that MrHume and MrMallon were not prepared to stand by those who are committed solely and totally to the democratic process and that they are not prepared to meet the commitments they have made in the Chamber. I refer specifically to MrMallon’s statement that he would be prepared to see the expulsion of SinnFéin if it were not prepared to commence decommissioning. All of that seems to have gone, as have the commitments made by MrAhern and all the others who tried to convince Unionists to place their trust in SinnFéin/IRA.
I was elected on a pledge to oppose the Belfast Agreement. Lest anyone misunderstand what we were opposed to, let me put it on record that our opposition to the Belfast Agreement was based on five fundamental principles.
We were opposed to all-Ireland bodies with executive powers over NorthernIreland (and I am pleased to say today that the actions of the Unionist grouping within the Assembly have managed to thwart that proposal); we were opposed to a united Ireland and to the erosion of British sovereignty; we were opposed to terrorists in government with control over the future of the people they had terrorised; and we were opposed to the mass release of terrorist criminals and to terrorists retaining weapons while the RUC was to be demoralised and disarmed.
I am not opposed to peace, stability and reconciliation, but, as we said when we addressed the people at the time of the referendum, the agreement offers no hope of peace, no end to violence and no likelihood of political stability. I ask people to measure our position today against that prediction of what the Belfast Agreement would or would not deliver.
Let us begin to see the end of the undemocratic structures of the Belfast Agreement. Let us clear the site and start to build upon the foundations to enable us to offer the people of Northern Ireland an accountable, clear and transparent form of government. Perhaps in the future we can return to this Chamber and start the process of offering the people of Northern Ireland what they are entitled to and what they deserve.
Today — and perhaps this will be the last sitting of the Assembly — it is noteworthy that in other parts of the United Kingdom democracy goes on. Scotland and Wales were not faced with a choice between having terrorists in government and having no government. Because of that, democracy continues in their Chambers, and Members are permitted to look after the interests of their electorates. I trust that, having seen the end of an undemocratic proposition, those who are committed to solely peaceful means will come together to achieve democratic government for the people of Northern Ireland.

Mr Norman Boyd: A serious allegation has been made in this Chamber by a Member from the SDLP — that two of our party members are linked to terrorist organisations. I ask you, MrPresidingOfficer, to investigate this scurrilous allegation.

Mr Donovan McClelland: On a point of order, MrInitial Presiding Officer. Does MrBoyd agree that some of his members from South Antrim have belonged to terrorist groupings?

Lord Alderdice: All sorts of things are being said backwards and forwards. I am monitoring as carefully as I can exactly what is being said, and not things that are being implied — and that is not very easy or straightforward. I ask Members to try to stick to the rather substantial and significant developments that there have been.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Surely the hon Member has a right to reply to the allegation thrown across the House by the hon Member from the SDLP. He should withdraw the comment. It is unfair that this man is said to be associated with terrorists and is not given an opportunity to deny it.

Lord Alderdice: The Member rose and made a remark about an earlier comment. His repetition of it was not accurate, as I recall. I had not called a point of order at that stage, so his intervention would not have been taken. However, now that the Member has raised the question, it is on the record. I have to take the point of order, and there may well be a response.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Can the Member for South Antrim (MrBoyd) assure us that no member of his party in that area belongs or has belonged to a terrorist organisation?

Lord Alderdice: Let memake it clear that Members address the Chair and not each other. I cannot confirm or deny or make any comment on the point that has been made. If there is a point of order it should be made to the Chair and not across the Chamber. Do you have a point of order?

Mr Donovan McClelland: Will you confirm that no member of MrBoyd’s party in South Antrim has belonged or now belongs to a terrorist organisation?

Lord Alderdice: I do not think that that is a point of order, nor do I believe that it is for me to confirm or not to confirm any such matter. It does not seem to me to bear much relevance to what is going on. It is not a point of order.

Mr Fraser Agnew: At the outset I must apologise on behalf of MrDenisWatson. Unfortunately his daughter has been taken ill, which is why he is not in the Chamber.
This debate seems to have arisen out of the comments by the recently resigned Deputy First Minister. He made some allegations as to where people on this side of the fence are coming from and where we stand. One of the significant things about the debate is that those of us who were elected on a "No" ticket have stood united throughout all of this. Our position has not altered in any way.
We are still opposed to psychopathic serial killers sitting in the Government of our country, and that position will not alter. Those guilty of Teebane, LaMon, "bloody Friday" — the leader of Provisional SinnFéin knows all about "bloody Friday" in Belfast and what happened then — have blood on their hands. For that reason this is a good day for democracy. We will not have those people sitting in the Government of this land.
It has been said that 72% of the people were in favour of the agreement. That is absolute nonsense. Anyone who makes such a comment is not living in the real world.
We all know now without a shadow of doubt that the vast majority of Unionist people are totally opposed to the agreement. They are also totally opposed to Provisional SinnFéin’s being in the Government of our land and to the treaties that are being put in place. It is very clear that the debate is not all about decommissioning or about preventing Catholics from coming into government. It is nauseating to hear members of the Provisional IRA in this Chamber accusing some of us of being anti-Catholic and of not wanting Catholics in government. It is slander — a deliberate and blatant lie by people who have based their whole campaign on lies. Republicans are very good at creating a lie and then building a case on it. How many people have been killed over the past year? Three have been killed and there have been 160beatings at the hands of the Provos in this so-called peace period. Peace may be the cry, but where this crowd is concerned war is the reality.
Decommissioning is not the only issue. We all know that, once in government and with the treaties in place, they would be quite happy to pull the plug on the Assembly. What will happen when the plug is pulled? The North/South bodies will still be there, still functioning, and we will have joint authority. That is one of my reasons for being totally opposed to the agreement.
Decommissioning has become a red herring. It is said that if we get rid of it everything will be hunky-dory and we can all sit down together and have a cosy arrangement. Of course, that will not be the case, for other issues have been forgotten. I know where I am coming from. I know where the people whom I represent are coming from, and I know their position. They do not want me to have anything to do with those who, by bomb and bullet, have tried to bring down this state and to undermine the credibility of the security forces, the Government and elected representatives, all in furtherance of a satanic end.
I know where I am coming from. I also know where this crowd is coming from. For that reason I am totally opposed to those aspects of the agreement that cover such matters as treaties. As we go forward, I remember how the last Assembly finished. The Speaker read a prorogation Order at about 3.00pm, and we stayed until after midnight and were led out or carried out by members of the RUC. PeterRobinson spoke for seven or eighthours, and we all respected his great stamina, power and authority.
I intend to speak not for seven or eight hours but for seven or eightminutes — and I will have trouble doing that.
I repeat that a realignment of Unionism is taking place. It is not being created but is evolving. A flame has been lit across this Province that will see the new Unionism evolve and eclipse these people for ever.

Mr David Ervine: I am disappointed with many things but especially with SeamusMallon’s resignation. I may not agree with everything that he believes in or says, but he is a man of integrity, political skill and ability. I am frightened and worried about the consequences of his resignation. It cannot be taken in isolation; it must be taken in the context of empty Benches, no executive authority in this society and the death of the Good Friday Agreement. I do not like to contradict my colleague, but I say "You have won; we have the death of the Good Friday Agreement."
Let us look at what that means. It means that the rest of the United Kingdom will have devolution and we will not. The rest of the United Kingdom has also suffered, whether through violence or through the consistent propping-up of this place in military terms. The people there have spent billions and have carried their boys home in body bags — boys who were trying to protect this society and give people an opportunity to find a way to the future.
The British Government have even less hair than I have, for they have been pulling it out for years wondering how the people of Northern Ireland might make a fist of the future. We have answered loudly and clearly that we are not able, not mature enough, to take on the responsibility of accountable democracy. It is dreadful that the governance of Northern Ireland by the people of Northern Ireland may not be possible.
MrAgnew says that a flame has been lit across NorthernIreland and that we are seeing a realignment. I am deeply disappointed at that, not because I will not be part of the flame but because of the damage that it will do to our relationships with the rest of the United Kingdom. Folk there will point to the fact that of the 56million people in the United Kingdom the Unionist community accounts for 900,000. Having accepted that the Good Friday Agreement is dead, you throw out with it the principle of consent for Northern Ireland.
The people of the United Kingdom, in perfectly correct democratic circumstances, might wish to have a direct say in the affairs of Northern Ireland. Many people on the mainland understand the difficulties in Northern Ireland, but they are vastly outnumbered by those who do not. We blame them for not understanding, but the skill and powers of oratory of our leaders have never quite managed to explain the problem. We rant and rave, and as I stand here worried and fearful for the future, the guffawing and the enjoyment of some are obscene in the extreme.
The world has been watching the debacle that is the Parliament of Northern Ireland. All of us should take heed of what the world thinks. We can no longer live in our little parochial society; we can no longer shout at the window and hope that the big bogeyman will go away. Governments no longer have friends; they have interests, and when their interests are damaged they will make decisions that damage others.
I hope never to be in a position to say "I told you so", but I feel certain that I will. The Unionist community is committing political suicide for very narrow and base reasons. It is not because it cannot countenance change, for the majority of the absentees can countenance change. As I have said before in this House, decommissioning was never an issue between Unionism and Nationalism. It was an issue within Unionism — a battle for hearts and minds, taking people absolutely nowhere. Those involved have succeeded, and there is no doubt that the consequences will be severe. And I have not even mentioned the potential for violence.
We live in what has been a violent society, though some Members believe that we live in a normal society where one can do normal things. In an abnormal society, in the creation of which every one of you is complicit — some perhaps less than others but complicit nevertheless — you might accept that you sometimes have to do abnormal things to try to create circumstances of normality. You are refusing to do that because you are the grand democrats.
The will of 72% of the people — actually 71·12%, but a substantial and serious majority — has today been stood on its head. The sneering grand democrats who do no wrong, the saintly people who have no complicity in the pain of an abnormal society, have stood democracy on its head. The 71·12% stated what they wanted, but the grand democrats would not have it. It did not mean that you could not have your view or your opinion, but you have agitated, tried to frighten people and hyped the circumstances out of all proportion. And you have succeeded. [Interruption]

Lord Alderdice: Order.

Mr David Ervine: The death of the political process leaves some of us with a very serious responsibility. Before there was a political process, there was a peace process. Had we waited for some politicians to create a peace process, of course it would never have happened. There are those of us who feel a moral responsibility to hang on to a peace process for as long as possible. We in the Progressive Unionist Party will turn our attention to persuading those who will listen that peace is still the better option.
I have to live in the real world, and the real world is potentially the Anglo-Irish Agreement Mk II. The people whom I assist in political analysis will not take easily to two Governments acting over their heads, as they did before. The Unionist community will be angry at having been bypassed in an Anglo-Irish Agreement Mk II. I appeal to TonyBlair to realise that that is the wrong way to go.
The people of Northern Ireland have to find some way to live together. They must find a way to share this earth. The pain, sorrow and tragedy have affected us all, and we must find a way of ensuring that our children and our children’s children will not do this all over again. None of that will be easy to achieve, but it will be a hell of a lot easier without an Anglo-Irish Agreement Mk II to further pollute and alienate.
Finally, I want to pay tribute to SeamusMallon. If there is another opportunity his skill, ability and talent will be used for the benefit of the people of Northern Ireland — provided that there is somebody sensible within Unionism to harness them and to ensure that there are no extremes.

Prof Monica McWilliams: I too should like to pay tribute to our Deputy First Minister (Designate). He said that he had tried and tried and tried again and that this process had been bled dry. On many occasions some of us felt that he too had been bled dry. His face often matched that white hair as we tried over and over and over again to make this work. He never stopped, and I hope that, despite his resignation, he will not give up. As he travelled around the countryside he probably saw that the peace process was ahead of the political process. It is up to us to try to make the two go in tandem. I hope that he will be able to walk that road with us and that one day we will be back here with an opportunity to vote him into office again.
Like many others in Northern Ireland, I am sad today. Some people, who have not even paid us the courtesy of turning up to give us their views, are determined to exclude others, but in doing so they have excluded us all. DrPaisley said that the strength of Unionism was rising again. That is not the kind of country that we want to live in or could live in — a country in which only one community has the strength. Nationalism could say the same, as could Republicanism and Loyalism, about the strength of its community. Whatever else we did on Good Friday, we recognised the diversity of the communities, not the strength of one community over another. If that is the voice of celebration, it is a very sad voice to hear in this Chamber. Where will the slogan "Not an inch for peace, not an inch for political compromise" lead us?
It is sad that at last night’s meeting it took only 15minutes to decide to throw out the declaration "The Way Forward". That was just one minute for each month that it has taken us to implement the agreement. We knew that implementation would be as hard as the work that went into making it. Some are arguing today that it is over, but we cannot let that bring us down.
Too often it was said that the anti-agreement people would win. If some wallow in the demonisation of others and in scurrilous comments such as have flown across this Chamber today, and if that is what passes for a celebration of bringing this agreement down, God help those who believe in the power of politics.
I did believe in politics. That is why, after the agreement and the referendum, we stood for election. We wanted to give the people something new.
What have the Ulster Unionists said "No" to? They have said "No" to the majority of people recognising the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. They have said "No" to the recognition of citizens’ allegiances — their Britishness and their Irishness — and to their entitlement to a democratic devolved Government in Northern Ireland. Most of all, they have said "No" to the consent of the people.
We never had an opportunity before to ask the people of NorthernIreland how they would like to be governed. We did that last year. Look at what we have done today. When are we going to give difference its due? Whatever else the Deputy First Minister (Designate) did, he told us not to be wedded to the old state of affairs in NorthernIreland, but to try to build a society in which we could be reconciled with each other. We still have to do that, and it will be an uphill struggle.
We have much hard work to do. We heard this morning — and MrErvine has reiterated it — that we must have a review. Can anyone imagine what that will be like? I heard people in the corridor saying "Review? We will give them a review." This is what the Good Friday Agreement overcame: a determination to have only one’s own position put forward. That will not work in NorthernIreland. This will be the most difficult review we ever had.
It has been said too often that we will never be able to put the pieces together again in the way we did on Good Friday. We shall have to try. As leader of the Women’s Coalition, I have often said that when sleeping women awake, mountains will move. We certainly have a hell of a lot of mountains to move. All I ask is that the Deputy First Minister (Designate) continue to help us move them.

Mr Robert McCartney: It was with a touch of sadness that I heard of SeamusMallon’s resignation. There are many things in politics that he and I do not share and many things on which we are in profound disagreement, but I take no personal joy in his resignation. He will be aware that if I had been responsible for the negotiation of an agreement with him and his colleagues it would have been very different from the Belfast Agreement. I think he also knows that whatever I had entered into I would have honoured.
I feel insulted by the patronising and high-flown lectures about our futures and our children’s futures that we have had today from the leaders of Sinn Féin and the PUP, both of which are inextricably linked with terrorist organisations that have inflicted murder and mayhem on both sections of the people of Northern Ireland. Each has been responsible not only for inflicting suffering on the other community but in many cases for inflicting even greater coercion and violence on members of its own.
I take no lessons about democracy from such people. I believe in democracy and in pluralism. I have no problem whatever, as I have said on more than one occasion in this Chamber, about sharing power or responsibility, equality or human rights with Catholics — Fenians, if you like — Republicans or Nationalists. But, as a democrat, I have profound disgust at the thought of sharing power with people who do not know the meaning of the word "democracy".
The Good Friday Agreement, as, sadly, it is called by many people — the Belfast Agreement, to give it its proper title — was founded on a fraud. It was a fraud against both communities, for its obscurantist language was deliberately designed to make both believe that it encapsulated their objectives. Nationalists and Republicans were, I believe, led to think that the agreement imposed on them only a duty to use whatever influence they might have on paramilitary and terrorist organisations to deliver decommissioning by 22May2000. I believe in strict terms, and I have said before in the Assembly that the agreement did not impose on parties connected with terrorist organisations a condition that those organisations should decommission by that date.
Such a condition was imposed by a far greater and higher authority — by the very fundamental principles of democracy and of democratic procedure. Nowhere in the democratic world was there such a Caliban, such a Frankenstein, such a monster, as the process that was designed to govern the people of NorthernIreland, for it would have permitted those who are inextricably linked with armed terrorists to take their places in a Government which was alleged to be democratic but which could, at any time, by the use or threat of violence, impose the wishes of a minority upon a majority.
Over the past three years I have found it very difficult not to respond when greeted in friendly terms by name — surname and Christian name — by members of political parties inextricably linked with terrorist organisations. Though it seems unnatural and discourteous, I do not respond, because I see absolutely no difference between SinnFéin and the IRA and absolutely no difference between DavidErvine’s party and the UVF. Both have inflicted the most disgusting crimes on society.
I will be happy at any time to engage in the democratic process with anyone, even if he has — and possibly continues to have — blood on his hands, but only if I am assured that he has given up violence permanently and completely and believes in the principles of democracy. When people were asked to give proof of their new-found democracy it was missing. Why? In a democracy a minority party must persuade the electorate to make it a majority party if it wishes to exercise power. But if a minority party can never persuade the electorate to make it a majority party, what does it do? [Interruption] No, you go out and get a gun or a bomb, and you threaten.
I listened to MrAdams patronising Unionists with lofty sentiments about democracy in the future and about our children. This is the man who was commander of the Belfastbrigade of the IRA on "bloodyFriday". This is the man who now presents himself as a kind, fatherly and thoughtful democrat. I listened with equal disgust to MrErvine as he strung together a collection of sound bites with the facility of a trained parrot. He told us what would happen in the streets. He postured and used all the guile of the advocate. To tell us what? Perhaps he was telling us that he is no longer associated with the UVF. He advises them politically. And there was the latent threat that people who know that they now have no Belfast Agreement might just have to resort to other things, that they may escape from his control, that they may continue to do all the violent, wicked and absolutely horrible things that the UVF has been doing.
I draw absolutely no distinction between terrorists. There are no such things as Republican terrorists and Loyalist terrorists, good terrorists within the agreement or bad terrorists outside it. There are only terrorists, and terrorists use violence, murder and bombings to achieve what they cannot achieve through the democratic process. Yet we have MrErvine and MrAdams patronising those who have no bombs and no guns and who have never killed anyone. I was not mentioned by MrAdams because in absolutely no circumstances do I measure up to any of the things of which he accused others. I have never carried bombs or associated with paramilitaries of any kind, whether Orange, Green, Republican or Loyalist — never.
I believe in pluralism and democracy, and while there are guns in the possession of people who are inextricably linked to political parties they cannot be included in a democratic Government. That is where I differ from Seamus. He believes that you can let them in for a little while. I believe that trying to house-train fascists gives a poor return, as GenvonSchleicher and vonPapen and all of those who thought that they would bring the National Socialists into government discovered in 1934. We are not about to rediscover it in Ulster in 1999.

Lord Alderdice: DrPaisley questioned whether I was following a somewhat unusual practice, and I confess that there is some truth in what he said. When the personal statement was being delivered by the former Deputy First Minister (Designate) I received a notification from the Secretary of State. However, as your Presiding Officer, I felt that its terms foreclosed on an opportunity for leaders of the parties to comment on what I believed was more than simply a personal statement. I therefore sought, on your behalf, the leave of the Secretary of State to hold back on what she had said until I felt that all the party leaders had had an opportunity to speak. I hope that what I did was right; it was certainly done with the best of intent.
The Secretary of State’s letter reads as follows:
"Under the Northern Ireland (Elections) Act 1998 it is my responsibility to determine at what times the Assembly shall meet.
On 14July1999, in accordance with the Schedule to the Act, I directed that the Assembly should meet from 15July at 10.30am until 30July at 6pm.
My direction of 14July1999 is now revoked with immediate effect. The Assembly should not meet until I have issued a further direction."
Adjourned at 1.25 pm.